⋆ [G] ⋆
]]
LCR4802: Medical Law
May/June Examination 2026 Revision Guide
Covers Past Papers: 2023, 2024 & 2025
⋆ ⋄ ⋆ ⋄ ⋆ ⋄ ⋆ ⋄ ⋆
[B] Law — College of Law, UNISA [B]
[B] Consolidated Exam Revision Guide
LCR4802
Module Code:
Medical Law
Module Name:
May/June 2023, 2024 & 2025
Papers Covered:
May/June Examination 2026
Prepared For:
8 (Credits: 12)
NQF Level:
College of Law, UNISA
College:
This guide consolidates questions and full answers from three years of May/June
examination papers. Focus on understanding the reasoning, not just the outcome.
[G] Exam Revision Notes | LCR4802 Medical Law | 2023–2026
,LCR4802 | Medical Law Exam Revision May/June 2023–2025 Consolidated
[>] SECTION A: MAY/JUNE 2025 EXAMINATION PAPER
Total marks: 100 | Duration: 2 hours
Question 1 [25 marks]
(a) [10 marks]
Question: Discuss the concept of imperitia culpae adnumeratur in the context of South
African medical law. Explain when a doctor will be held liable on this basis, and identify a
leading case that illustrates the principle.
Answer:
[!] Key Concept
Imperitia culpae adnumeratur is a Latin maxim meaning “want of skill is
reckoned as negligence.” In medical law it means that a doctor who lacks the
knowledge, skill, or competence required to perform a particular intervention
is treated as negligent – provided the doctor knew, or should reasonably have
known, of this deficiency.
When liability arises:
• The doctor lacked the necessary knowledge, skill, or competence for the specific
intervention.
• The doctor was aware, or should reasonably have been aware, of this shortcoming.
• The patient died or suffered harm as a direct result.
This is not a form of vicarious liability (do not confuse the two). It attaches personally
to the practitioner who undertook the procedure without the requisite skill.
Leading case – S v Mkwetshana 1965 (2) SA 493 (N):
The accused, a traditional healer practising without proper medical training, undertook
a procedure beyond his competence. The court held that performing an act for which
one does not have the necessary skill constitutes negligence in itself. The judgment con-
firmed that claiming ignorance of one’s own limitations is no defence: the duty is to
Page 2 of 27
,LCR4802 | Medical Law Exam Revision May/June 2023–2025 Consolidated
know what you do not know.
[*] Exam Tip
Always pair the maxim with the Mkwetshana case. The examiner typically
awards 2 marks for correctly defining the maxim, 4 marks for the elements of
liability, and 4 marks for applying a named case.
(b) [15 marks]
Question: Distinguish between the three categories of medical negligence recognised in
South African law and provide a practical example of each.
Answer: South African courts recognise three distinct categories of negligent conduct
by a medical practitioner. Each concerns a failure of a different duty.
Description Example
Category
Inadequate care, knowledge, or skill A general practitioner
Negligence as to
applied when diagnosing or treating misreads an ECG and
diagnosis or treat- discharges a patient who
a patient
ment is suffering a myocardial
infarction
Failure to instruct a patient on how A surgeon fails to warn a
Negligence as to
to behave after treatment to protect patient not to engage in
post-treatment strenuous activity after a
their own health
advice hernia repair
Failure to warn a patient of a ma- A gynaecologist performs
Negligence as to
terial risk attached to a proposed a laparoscopy without
risk disclosure disclosing the 1-in-200
intervention
risk of bowel perforation
Standard of care: The standard is not the highest possible degree of care and skill –
it is the care and skill of a reasonably competent practitioner in that specialty. This is
measured objectively against what a reasonable medical professional with similar train-
ing would have done in the same circumstances.
Page 3 of 27
, LCR4802 | Medical Law Exam Revision May/June 2023–2025 Consolidated
[!] Watch Out
The standard is not perfection. Courts do not expect doctors to be infallible;
they expect them to meet the standard of a reasonable professional. Confusing
“highest possible” with “reasonable” is a common exam error.
Page 4 of 27
]]
LCR4802: Medical Law
May/June Examination 2026 Revision Guide
Covers Past Papers: 2023, 2024 & 2025
⋆ ⋄ ⋆ ⋄ ⋆ ⋄ ⋆ ⋄ ⋆
[B] Law — College of Law, UNISA [B]
[B] Consolidated Exam Revision Guide
LCR4802
Module Code:
Medical Law
Module Name:
May/June 2023, 2024 & 2025
Papers Covered:
May/June Examination 2026
Prepared For:
8 (Credits: 12)
NQF Level:
College of Law, UNISA
College:
This guide consolidates questions and full answers from three years of May/June
examination papers. Focus on understanding the reasoning, not just the outcome.
[G] Exam Revision Notes | LCR4802 Medical Law | 2023–2026
,LCR4802 | Medical Law Exam Revision May/June 2023–2025 Consolidated
[>] SECTION A: MAY/JUNE 2025 EXAMINATION PAPER
Total marks: 100 | Duration: 2 hours
Question 1 [25 marks]
(a) [10 marks]
Question: Discuss the concept of imperitia culpae adnumeratur in the context of South
African medical law. Explain when a doctor will be held liable on this basis, and identify a
leading case that illustrates the principle.
Answer:
[!] Key Concept
Imperitia culpae adnumeratur is a Latin maxim meaning “want of skill is
reckoned as negligence.” In medical law it means that a doctor who lacks the
knowledge, skill, or competence required to perform a particular intervention
is treated as negligent – provided the doctor knew, or should reasonably have
known, of this deficiency.
When liability arises:
• The doctor lacked the necessary knowledge, skill, or competence for the specific
intervention.
• The doctor was aware, or should reasonably have been aware, of this shortcoming.
• The patient died or suffered harm as a direct result.
This is not a form of vicarious liability (do not confuse the two). It attaches personally
to the practitioner who undertook the procedure without the requisite skill.
Leading case – S v Mkwetshana 1965 (2) SA 493 (N):
The accused, a traditional healer practising without proper medical training, undertook
a procedure beyond his competence. The court held that performing an act for which
one does not have the necessary skill constitutes negligence in itself. The judgment con-
firmed that claiming ignorance of one’s own limitations is no defence: the duty is to
Page 2 of 27
,LCR4802 | Medical Law Exam Revision May/June 2023–2025 Consolidated
know what you do not know.
[*] Exam Tip
Always pair the maxim with the Mkwetshana case. The examiner typically
awards 2 marks for correctly defining the maxim, 4 marks for the elements of
liability, and 4 marks for applying a named case.
(b) [15 marks]
Question: Distinguish between the three categories of medical negligence recognised in
South African law and provide a practical example of each.
Answer: South African courts recognise three distinct categories of negligent conduct
by a medical practitioner. Each concerns a failure of a different duty.
Description Example
Category
Inadequate care, knowledge, or skill A general practitioner
Negligence as to
applied when diagnosing or treating misreads an ECG and
diagnosis or treat- discharges a patient who
a patient
ment is suffering a myocardial
infarction
Failure to instruct a patient on how A surgeon fails to warn a
Negligence as to
to behave after treatment to protect patient not to engage in
post-treatment strenuous activity after a
their own health
advice hernia repair
Failure to warn a patient of a ma- A gynaecologist performs
Negligence as to
terial risk attached to a proposed a laparoscopy without
risk disclosure disclosing the 1-in-200
intervention
risk of bowel perforation
Standard of care: The standard is not the highest possible degree of care and skill –
it is the care and skill of a reasonably competent practitioner in that specialty. This is
measured objectively against what a reasonable medical professional with similar train-
ing would have done in the same circumstances.
Page 3 of 27
, LCR4802 | Medical Law Exam Revision May/June 2023–2025 Consolidated
[!] Watch Out
The standard is not perfection. Courts do not expect doctors to be infallible;
they expect them to meet the standard of a reasonable professional. Confusing
“highest possible” with “reasonable” is a common exam error.
Page 4 of 27
